Catholics are now able to hear Luther’s challenge for the Church of today, recognising him as a “witness to the gospel” (From Conflict to Communion 29).

As horrifying as this is, let’s be honest: Exceedingly few people (other than so-called “traditionalists” – aka Catholics – who already know better) even read this garbage, and far fewer still put any real stock in it.

In other words, rank and file under-nourished Catholics, the majority of whom can barely articulate the basics of their own faith, aren’t going to immerse themselves in the writings of Martin Luther just because the self-deluded ecumaniancs in Rome published an obscure document singing his praises.

Besides, most of them likely receive all of the Protestant theology they can handle right in their very own parishes (that is, those that still bother showing up for Mass.)

Now, that’s not to say that these ecumenical texts are entirely without value; in reality, they are quite valuable inasmuch as they provide insight into how the madmen in Rome intend to lead even more souls to perdition in the months and years ahead.

Remember, those running the show in Rome these days are no longer concerned with the salvific mission that was given to the Church by Jesus Christ. Theirs is a more earthbound mission; one that is entirely humanistic.

Their words and deeds are, therefore, far more political in nature than Apostolic.

With this important distinction in mind, the more observant among us will notice that official Vatican statements (like the document under discussion here) often contain hints as to what lies ahead.

In other words, one will sometimes find “seeds” planted in these texts that are rather like “trial balloons” meant to test the ecclesial (political) climate on some point or another.

For instance, the controversial quote about Martin Luther (above), for all of the attention it has been receiving over the last few days, is really nothing new; it was taken (as indicated) from the 2013 Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity document cited in parenthesis, “From Conflict to Communion,” which reads:

Implicit rapprochement with Luther’s concerns has led to a new evaluation of his catholicity, which took place in the context of recognizing that his intention was to reform, not to divide, the church. This is evident in the statements of Johannes Cardinal Willebrands and Pope John Paul II. [7] The rediscovery of these two central characteristics of his person and theology led to a new ecumenical understanding of Luther as a “witness to the gospel.”

NB: The footnote found in the excerpt above references a lecture from Cardinal Willebrands that dates back to 1970, and a letter of Pope John Paul II from 1983, wherein Luther’s “catholicity” and pure “intentions” were “recognized.”

How these modernists managed to judge the interior disposition of Luther’s soul from their vantage point some four centuries later is anyone’s guess. The important point, however, is that these were the “seeds” that blossomed into Luther’s anointing by Rome as a “witness to the gospel” in 2013; only to be repeated just last week.

While it took several decades for the Willebrands and Wojtyla seeds to so germinate, we must admit that, in our day, the process is moving at a much faster pace.

In the three years since Rome first professed Luther as a “witness to the gospel,” we have been treated to such rotten fruits as Francis condemning proselytism as “solemn nonsense” and “poison,” his public apology issued “as Bishop of Rome and Pastor of the Catholic Church, for the non-evangelical behavior on the part of Catholics” toward Protestants, and, of course, his recent visit to Lund kicking off a year-long celebration of the Protestant revolt.

With all of this having been said, the questions we should be asking now are simply these:

What kinds of “seeds” have been scattered in this most recent document from the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, and most importantly, into what might we expect those seeds to blossom?

The answer is perhaps as predictable as it is lamentable; it is, in a word, intercommunion.

In fact, if we look a bit more closely at the ecumenical document issued back in 2013, we will find that the seeds of intercommunion were planted therein in any number of places; not the least of which is its very title: “From Conflict to Communion.” [emphasis added]

Again – bear in mind that these men are political animals; they are Apostolic in neither makeup nor mission.

For them, “communion” (small “c”) and “Communion” (capital “C” – as in “Holy Communion”) are one and the same thing.

The Eucharist is little more than an expression of the “unity” that, in their view, already exists between the Protestants and the Catholic Church.

Note, for instance, the following excerpt taken from the 2013 text:

While the Council of Trent defended the practice of adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, it took as its starting point that the primary purpose of the eucharist is the communion of the faithful. The eucharist was instituted by Christ to be consumed as spiritual food. (From Conflict to Communion – 150)

First, note very well that the word “Eucharist” in this text, like that of “communion,” is not capitalized (neither in English, nor in Italian).

Secondly, be certain to note very well the blatant and deliberate distortion of the dogmatic teaching of the Council of Trent which most certainly did not state “that the primary purpose of the eucharist is the communion of the faithful.”

For the record, in setting forth “the ancient, complete, and in every part perfect faith and doctrine touching the great mystery of the Eucharist,” the Council of Trent took as its starting point (to use the parlance of the 2013 text):

“…the Eucharist, considered as being a true and singular sacrifice … a visible sacrifice, such as the nature of man requires.” (See Council of Trent, Session XXIII, Chapter I)

Fast forward to the present…

In the recently published Resources for the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity for 2017, under the heading, “Ecumenical Challenges*” (we will examine the asterisk momentarily), we find:

Another challenge is the frustration that many people feel, especially those who have laboured for a long time at the grassroots level, when they cannot see any progress in ecumenical matters. This frustration is felt most sharply when it comes to sharing the Lord’s Supper across confessional boundaries, known as Eucharistic sharing.

The asterisk for this portion of the document points to the following statement:

* This text is reproduced under the sole authority and responsibility of the Council of Churches in Germany (ACK).

The level of duplicity in Rome in our day is almost beyond belief! It is without any doubt whatsoever, diabolical!

While this may appear to be a disclaimer that in some way distances Rome from the sentiments that are being expressed, don’t be fooled – among the members of the Council of Churches in Germany (ACK) is none other than the Roman Catholic Church!

In other words, make no mistake about it: The ecumaniacs in Rome, up to and including Francis, are determined to eliminate the frustration that they themselves feel by the lack of Eucharistic sharing between Catholics and Protestants.

(Note, in this case, the modernists chose to capitalize “Eucharist;” i.e., there can be no doubt that they mean to speak of Protestants being invited to Holy Communion in Catholic churches at Holy Mass!)

This particular seed, just like the ones ordered toward the veneration of Martin Luther – the same that were initially sown so long ago – is not singular in nature, but rather is it part of a multi-faceted campaign to prepare the faithful for the program of intercommunion that has already been decided upon.

You may add to all that has been highlighted herein the entirely staged Q&A session that took place at the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Rome on Sunday November 15, 2015.

There, as readers may recall, Francis was addressed by a Lutheran woman who said that she and her husband “regret being divided in faith and not being able to participate together in the Lord’s Supper.”

He ultimately responded by saying:

One baptism, one Lord, one faith. Talk to the Lord and go forward. I dare not say more.

Many (including the present writer) understood this to be a “go ahead” to take Communion at Mass. (For a more in-depth treatment of this exchange, see my post HERE.)

Two months later, it was reported (and never denied by Rome) that a delegation of Lutherans were offered Holy Communion at a Mass held in St. Peter’s Basilica following a meeting with Francis. (For more, see LifeSite News HERE.)

Then, just last month, Cardinal Kasper, in an interview with the newspaper of the Italian Episcopal Conference, Avvennire, said:

“I hope that the next declaration opens the way for shared Eucharistic communion in special cases.” (For more, see LifeSite News HERE.)

One may recall that Francis made a little joke back in 2015 when the Lutheran woman spoke of her frustration at not being able “to participate together in the Lord’s Supper” with her Catholic husband, saying:

When asked about sharing in the Lord’s Supper, it is not easy for me to answer you, especially in front of a theologian like Cardinal Kasper!

If Amoris Laetitia has taught us anything, it’s that this is no joke; indeed, far from it.

Kasper’s modernist wishes are Jorge’s commands; even when they fly in the face of the Divine Law. They are, after all, birds of a feather.

So, what exactly does the recently published document from the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity portend?

Barring an act of Divine intervention (that includes first and foremost either the conversion, the death, or the official deposition of Francis), intercommunion is effectively going to receive Rome’s “official” stamp of approval in the not-too-distant future.

If this article helped shed light on the darkness emanating from modernist Rome, please consider helping us continue our efforts in the New Year:

Related Posts

Latest Comments

Tom AJanuary 9, 2017

Rome is not going to fix itself. Get over the pipe dream that somehow a real Pope is coming out of the NO modernist sect. It not going to happen. Ever! The restoration of the Church can only begin when the Traditional bishops do what they were consecrated to do: Govern! We Catholics have been in the wilderness for over 40 years. We want a Pope! Bishop Fellay and others, get off your collective backsides and take back our Church from these usurpers.

Tom A- I agree. It is time (actually passed time!) for Bishop Fellay to call in the troops and send them out into battle. A battleship in the harbor is always safe, but does nothing for the war effort. This is war!!!

I agee with your sentiment, but unfortunately the sspx bishops were deliberately consecrated without the governing power. They have no ordinary jurisdiction, and the ‘reactive’ supplied jurisdiction they engage to justify what they do does not enable them to ‘pro actively’ take over the helm.

Thank you, Paul M. This is a time of great necessity. Take over the helm at any cost. It is the Holy, Roman Catholic Church they are defending. There are times in war when citizens had to do the work of the military in order to save their country.

Thanks 2cents. You may have something. The first thing I thought after making my post was that us lay folk naturally look to our bishops for leadership. Then the thought that we actually do REQUIRE leadership means that leadership is a necessity. And if it is a necessity then it must be included in supplied jurisdiction.
The other way of looking at it is what you allude to… to attack error wherever we see it is within the power of even layfolk. If Louie can lead the way attacking the errors of V2 and provide us with a path to follow, so much more so can a bishop.
The question that then presents itself is : why do were hear so little from our Traditional bishops these days? Are they too distracted with something else by any chance? Like obtaining a canonical status that they don’t need in practice?
Yes we are at war and the thick of a raging battle is certainly not the place to think about terms of surrender.

Paul M., The NO bishops were not even validly consecrated at all. That doesnt stop them from destroying the Church. It is that type of legalism that actually plays right into the hands of the modernists. This is a time of emergency.

When the day arrives that Romes officially declares interfaith communion for any or all dioceses then we will certainly see before our eyes without question the desolation of abomination. Sadly I believe it shall come to pass and Divine intervention will not be far off . These men are infiltrators and put in place by the diabolical. They know full well that they are destroying the church as the world comprehends it to be, but they the terrible fools that they are can never destroy Christ’s True Church, She remains in our lowly little hearts under Our Ladies Mantle. We must be steadfast,praying and making reparation as per request of Our Lady. Pope Benedict XVI is still our pontiff, good bad or indifferent and Jorge Bergoglio is an agent of the diabolical with full knowledge that he is there to fulfill this destruction according to plan, he is by no means deluded he has been carefully formed and made ready for this task. I believe he was recruited from a very early age and I pray for his conversion but for him I fear the worst.

I’m predicting not only will they allow Communion for Protestants, but that they will also formulate an entirely new ‘rite’ of mass to be implemented in every Novus Ordo parish to exist alongside the Novus Ordo rite, if not replace it entirely, so as to better suit the Lutheran view of the Eucharist, and also in an attempt to please the Catholic faithful, whereby they can continue to absurdly claim, “Look! We changed nothing!” Why, this is only a separate concelebratory service!”

While I still side with Siscoe, I’ve gotta admit, at some point with Francis, it would strain credulity to even consider that man a theist, let alone a Catholic. Just look at the theology these fools follow, particularly ‘2+2 can equal five in theology’ Spadaro. (Yes, he actually said that!)

Can one even reason with this kind of insanity? How does one even send dubias or warnings to such madmen?

I would like to hypothetically ask Siscoe, can the Pope be removed at all if he is in fact clinically insane? In which case no dubias or warnings or procedure can do any good?

But sadly Francis isn’t insane. He’s just evil, him and Spadaro. I’m guessing al their stupid phrases are likely just a smokescreen for what is really just a pure masonic demolition-job. But they’ll pretend they’re crazy and mixed up because they know the majority of bishops and Catholics are suckers who’ll grab any excuse they can to protect the saboteurs believing it to be the will of whatever spirit it is that the Francis-cult follows…

Johnno, Francis is not an abberation of the Conciliar modernist church. He is a product of it. There’s no one left in modernist Rome to fix this problem. Burke et al are simply milder versions. True faithful need to stand up, say enough is enough, elect a True Pope and restore Creation. Why are we wasting time? Let the modernists go the way of all the other mainstream protestants. Extinction. This legalism being advocated by the Siscoes and Salzas does nothing but hamper any conclusive action. Can you imagine the great Catholic saints and warriors of the past sitting by idle while heretics and pagans sack Christendom? All because of some silly interpretation of medieval theologians and we are supposed to say, ” well if Bellarmine says so, guess we just have to wait.” What rubbish! The legalism of inaction is nothing more than cowardice. It is time to fight for our Church!

The New Order already suits the Lutherans just fine.
After concocting it with Modernists, the Lutheran that helped in this concoction boasted that they had finished the work that Luther began.
And other Protestant theologians immediately praised the abomination, saying they now have the Rite in which Catholics and Protesants can finally use along side and together.

Ann Barnhardt for all of her good will has a bit of a blind spot. Humour me for a bit. She rants and raves about Muslims but neglects to expose the real enemy as far as I am aware and that is Zionist Judaism. These rascals have caused more death and destruction in the last hundred years through their malevolent war mongering than any nation on earth except for the U.S. Which, by the way, is responsible for 81 percent of all wars since the end of WWII. The reason the world is in the shape it’s in is because these Khazars who call themselves Jews own virtually everything: all the news media [both print and electronic], all the banks including the your FED, in the UK it’s referred to as “The City”, the so-called entertainment industry [Hollywood and Music], and are the owners and pushers of pornography. And, Rome, in it’s infantile wisdom kisses the toe of every blinkin’ rabbi that happens to cross their path. But don’t take my word for it, you can find all this information everywhere on the web: especially YouTube. Just type in “Jewish Gangsters” and you mate will have plenty to fill you plate. No pun intended.

Very good point about Ann Barnhardt. You wrote, “has a bit of a blind spot.” Thats being extremely polite. I have enjoyed a lot of her unique writing and insight, but found it agonizing that she never names the jew in spite of having vast knowledge of religion, geopolitics, and finance. You really have to wonder, why?

“Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tell’s us. Was not everybody about Him saying: ‘Whatever has He been doing with her?’ Secondly, with Mary Magdalen, and thirdly with the women taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus even, Christ who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died.” (ref. Trishreden, Weimer Edition, Vol. 2, Pg. 107. – What a great blasphemy from a man who is regarded as “great reformer”!).
.
“If we allow them – the Commandments – any influence in our conscience, they become the cloak of all evil, heresies and blasphemies” (ref. Comm. ad Galat, p.310).
.
“There is no scandal greater, more dangerous, more venomous, than a good outward life, manifested by good works and a pious mode of life. That is the grand portal, the highway that leads to damnation.” (ref. Denifle’s Luther et Lutheranisme, Etude Faite d’apres les sources. Translation by J. Paquier (Paris, A. Picard, 1912-13), VOl. II, pg. 128).
.
“To kill a peasant is not murder; it is helping to extinguish the conflagration. Let there be no half measures! Crush them! Cut their throats! Transfix them. Leave no stone unturned! To kill a peasant is to destroy a mad dog!” – “If they say that I am very hard and merciless, mercy be damned. Let whoever can stab, strangle, and kill them like mad dogs” (ref. Erlangen Vol 24, Pg. 294).
.
“Suppose I should counsel the wife of an impotent man, with his consent, to giver herself to another, say her husband’s brother, but to keep this marriage secret and to ascribe the children to the so-called putative father. The question is: Is such a women in a saved state? I answer, certainly.” (ref. On Marriage).
.

I haven’t got the foggiest idea of what it will take to “fix this”. Just some opinions.
Francis is either going to live longer and destroy the papacy and the church, or he will die and they will elect someone worse. Or someone just as bad. Certainly not anybody better.
The Cardinals mainly support him in his heresy. They like it, are inspired by it, heck, these men want Muslims to invade and get rid of the Christians entirely.
Bishops are embarrassingly weak or complicit. They aren’t going to rock any boats.
We are going to have Protestants taking Our Lord in the Holy Eucharist. It’s awful, and what I am about to say, I do not mean disrespectfully, God forbid, but, it will not last one second longer than God wants it to or is willing to allow it. We can no more stop these fiends from doing this than we can prevent the solar eclipse the western hemisphere is going to experience in August. It’s their church friends, we just work here.
We’re likely going underground. I am looking forward to the formal correction. I’m betting it comes, but if it doesn’t, I’ve got a plan. If Communion is open to Protestants, that is the final act for me. Mass every other week at our closest Mass in the Extraordinary Form (not very close at all), and all the other Catholic accoutrements as we can. More devotions at home, rosary, prayer, etc.
Here’s to staying hopeful in the year of Fatima!
Stay faithful my friends! God help us!

I am with you Evangeline!Tradition lives and will outlive the Novus Ordo crowd and its Heretical leaders.Latin Mass,the SSPX,or any other Traditional order for me!If underground we must go then so be it, but i have a feeling that the modernists have played their last card and are on the way out.The average age of a Modernist is now about 80 odd yrs of age.

Blessed Anna-Maria Taigi spoke of this restoration in the following manner:
“After the three days of darkness, Saints Peter and Paul, having come down from heaven, will preach throughout the world and designate a new pope. A great light will flash from their bodies and will settle upon the cardinal, the future Pontiff. Then Christianity will spread throughout the world. Whole nations will join the Church shortly before the reign of Anti-Christ. These conversions will be amazing. Those who shall survive shall have to conduct themselves well. There shall be innumerable conversions of heretics, who will return to the bosom of the Church; all will note the edifying conduct of their lives, as well as that of all other Catholics. Russia, England, and China will come to the Church.”